SA-CD.net - Rolling Stones: Goats Head Soup

add to wish list | library

12 of 12 recommend this,
would you recommend it?

yes | no

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors using the paid links below. As an Amazon Associate SA-CD.net earns from qualifying purchases.

Reviews: Rolling Stones: Goats Head Soup

read discussion

Reviews: 3

Review by Sergey July 9, 2013 (0 of 2 found this review helpful)	Performance: Sonics:
The original recording probably one of the worst for this group. Clearly audible sloppiness in separate tracks. But generally album is perceived holistically and surprisingly this format even extends to such recording an unprecedented level. Not a very good quality of the individual fragments listens for granted. And this is what that special charm. It does not sound bad, it seems to me that it was done and it should be.
Was this review helpful to you? yes \| no

Review by analogue December 2, 2014 (5 of 7 found this review helpful)	Performance: Sonics:
I was extremely let down by this Shm Sacd reissue. I will get to the reason shortly. I was, like most fans of Shm Sacd;s extremely happy when a reissue program was announced of the first wave of these awesome discs. There were several titles I simply could not get at the time. I ordered five rock sacds and couldn't wait to hear them. That was until I hit play that is. Like most music buyers I was most chagrined that the out of print sacds were going for huge prices.......now I could get them at a bonus price. Some things are to good to be true. These reissues were cheaper than the first go around. I suspected the reason was new packaging. I now suspect that there was also some quality corners cut as well to justify the new price. The new packaging is nice......much better for storage. Its essentially the traditional plastic cd hard cases. The plastic is more robust than the usual cd cases.......but cd cases they are. The liner notes to these sacds are nothing more than the notes of the remastered cd's and they are in English. Included also is the white booklet from the second wave of Shm Sacds giving info as to the mastering person of the original sacd. Lastly the usual Obi strip is also included. The album is a decent one by the Stones and includes several hits that are on most hits compilations. Some mud is evident on the recorded sound and this shouldn't surprise anyone familiar with the early Stones output from the early to mid 70's. The problem with this disc and the other four I ordered is the following: For reasons unknown the original Dsd transfers were tinkered with and basically ruined. Treble and compression are clearly evident on all five sacd's I ordered and I find this unacceptable and downright unfair. Its very difficult to sit through this disc from start to finish. There used to be a gorgeous inky, airy quality to these sacds..........now there is a sonic bludgeoning to the listener. A raspy, digital bloomy quality. This sound is not delicate and enrapturing. I played some other sacds from other techs just to make sure it wasn't my system acting up. Oh no...............its these new discs. They are dreadful/ All five have the same generic sound to them. What used to be the best sounding sacd's on the planet have been reduced to digital sounding. harsh and bothersome sounding discs. Gone is the beautiful. organic tape sound that made these sacd's so special. Now they sound ordinary and I would argue that if the Shm portion of then stats usually mean quality........now its rendered meaningless. I still cant believe what has transpired here. Shame on Universal Japan for such a blunder. How does the sound go from pure tape sound to traditional compressed and digital sounding sacd's??? I will be listening very carefully next year to the new 2015 releases. If they sound like the five I purchased I will drop this label like a hot potato. I also have to wonder if the other sacd's were ruined as well. How do the Bill Evans jazz titles fare now??? Will other fans hear what I'm hearing??? Not recommended even if you're desperate for this title. There was absolutely no reason to mess with the original Dsd transfers.
Was this review helpful to you? yes \| no

Review by Marpow March 22, 2015 (1 of 2 found this review helpful)	Performance: Sonics:
Rolling Stones: Goats Head Soup SHM SACD Stereo Only. Originally released in 1973 one year after Exile On Main Street. This disc is a re release of a earlier, 2011, SHM SACD release. This Japanese disc released 11-26-2014. Performance: Recorded in Jamaica and obviously still carrying the vibe of Exile. Angie, a number 1 single for the Stones. I like this disc as it still carry's the country blues feel of the previous album but as artists they are trying to move forward. The other musicians on the recording, the usual suspects, if you know the Stones, always round out the sound very well. Personally as a fan this was it for me coming back to Stones for Some Girls. Stereo Sonics: As others have so graciously put, The Stones are not the audiophile dream, they are a rock n roll band, the best in the world. I would be a fool to not pay attention to past recordings for comparison. Unfortunately vinyl trumps, but not by much. My ears hear a very good recording that is well balanced but does not play well loud. Fortunately this is mostly a laid back disc and the lower volume is complimentary. The sound stage is narrow, unfortunately but has good quality's of drums resonating very well. Guitars strumming very likable. A little tinny at times. Packaging: Plastic jewel case with square corners. I always thought it weird that The Stones are dressed up as lady's and have always wondered if that was a real goats head in the soup pot. Mini paper booklet with original liner notes and credits. Mini black and white Japanese booklet with English lyrics. Green label disc. With the Rolling Stones and the fact they have been with me since my record buying experience in the 60's, depending on my mood I will like one over the other at different times. I like this recording now. Always the question is, will SHM SACD trump an RBCD for the money? Unfortunately in my world the answer is no.
Was this review helpful to you? yes \| no